Before and after
How far the standard intervenes.
These pairs show degree of intervention rather than fixed templates. Every revised version uses only facts present in its source. Where a stronger version needs a specific figure or actor, the source supplies it; the skill never invents one to replace a vague statement.
This is the actual guidance the skill uses. This page presents the skill's example set. Read the exact source, examples.md, on GitHub (opens in a new tab).
Lead with the conclusion
It is worth noting that there are several areas where the current implementation could create challenges: unclear ownership, no rollback procedure, and an untested recovery path.
The current implementation has 3 unresolved points: unclear ownership, no rollback procedure, and an untested recovery path.
The hedge goes and the count leads. All 3 points survive unchanged.
Remove artificial balance
The team has been working hard, but the process still lacks an accountable owner, an approval gate, and tested recovery.
The process lacks an accountable owner, an approval gate, and tested recovery.
Add progress or mitigating evidence only when it changes the assessment; a specific, material gain is a fact and stays.
Preserve technical agency
The firewall blocks inbound connections from untrusted networks.
The infrastructure team made that firewall change.
Both come from one source sentence: “After the change review, the infrastructure team configured the firewall to block inbound connections from untrusted networks and confirmed that the firewall now blocks them.” Either fact can lead, depending on which one matters.
Preserve useful adverbs
The system is extremely unreliable.
The service dropped 14 percent of requests during the test window.
Use the specific figure only when the source or a measurement provides it. Do not invent a number to replace a vague modifier; if none is available, keep the statement qualitative and flag the missing measurement. A legitimate modifier stays: “The encryption keys are cryptographically isolated from the application workload.”
Executive request
I wanted to reach out to see if we could align on the warehouse project: the owner, the critical path, the unresolved dependencies, and the recovery plan, before Thursday at 3 p.m.
Please confirm the warehouse project's owner, critical path, unresolved dependencies, and recovery plan before 3:00 p.m. Thursday.
The ask becomes explicit and the deadline exact. All 4 items are unchanged.
Replace executive template phrasing
The agenda looks highly relevant to my work, particularly the sessions on regulatory interoperability, cyber resilience, and audit readiness.
The agenda covers 3 areas I work on: regulatory interoperability, cyber resilience, and audit readiness.
Keep the same topics and state the writer's connection to them, rather than asserting relevance with an intensifier. An abstract-noun frame becomes a direct statement: “My main areas of interest are AI governance and cybersecurity” becomes “I am interested in AI governance and cybersecurity.”
Incident status
The situation appears to be under control, and the team is continuing to work diligently: the affected server is isolated, file transfers resumed at 06:40, the root cause is not yet confirmed, and the legacy environment still requires rebuild approval.
The affected server is isolated. File transfers resumed at 06:40. The root cause is not yet confirmed, and the legacy environment still requires rebuild approval.
The reassurance goes. The 4 facts stay, in the same order.
Proofreading with minimal intervention
The vendor have confirmed they will provide there response by Friday and we should be able to review it early next week.
The vendor has confirmed that it will respond by Friday. We should be able to review the response early next week.
The source is a flawed draft on purpose. “vendor have” and “there response” are the errors a proofreading pass catches; the corrected version fixes the agreement and rewrites the second as “respond”.
Without “that”, “it” reads as the object of “confirmed”; the inserted “that” marks it as the subject of a clause.
Do not restructure a proofreading request into an executive rewrite unless clarity requires it.
Try it on your own writing
Copy a prompt and run it against your own draft, or install the skill so the standard is available in any chat.